| Author | Message | ||
| Terry Teadtke (Imsa)
New member Username: Imsa Post Number: 1 Registered: 5-2003 |
I can't help but to throw my 2 cents here regarding the Mk IV and the Enzo. I don�t own a Ferrari nor do I plan on owning one in the foreseeable future. The Enzo�s an interesting car to say the least but not my cup a tea. Is the Enzo fast? Yes. As fast as the MK IV? Probably not. Is the Enzo technically more advanced than the MK IV? By light years. Could the Enzo finish a 24 hour race? Not in your wildest dreams. You need to remember that in order to win a race you must first finish the race( Ford pretty much had that figured out). The Ferrari�s just too fragile of a machine. The MK IV has a very simple NASCAR proven 427 that will last forever between rebuilds. The Ferrari engine has all sorts of belts, overhead cams,complex electronics, computers, and other various things that can break or quit working for no aparrent reason. Basically we�re comparing apples to pomegranates. If the Ferrari enthusiasts want something to think about, that MK IV LeMans winning car can be tuned up by just about anyone for less than $50.00 in parts bought at the local NAPA, a timing light, feeler gauge, a few basic hand tools. Might cost a $100.00 if you have someone do for you. I think I�ll take the MK IV IMSA | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1458 Registered: 10-2002 |
Terry Check out "A French Kiss With Death" If you love 917's you'll love that book. (A story of the making of the movie LeMans) | ||
| Terry Springer (Tspringer)
Member Username: Tspringer Post Number: 530 Registered: 4-2002 |
Well, to me the GT40 has it all over the Enzo. Sure the Enzo is probably faster on the street and perhaps on the track, but as has been said thats apples and oranges. I just think the GT40 looks so much better and I would bet its more fun to drive. One reason I love the Daytona so much is the thing is just so totally involving to drive. All of the controls are so dynamically tied together and pushing the car at all demands intense concentration. Modern supercars like the Enzo or Porsche GT Carrera do too much of the driving for you. Plus the Enzo is just plain wierd looking. My all time favorite in this type car would have to be the 917K. The P4 was awesome and is better looking, the GT40 is gorgeous and does bring such history... but when the 917 came out the writting was on the wall for Ford and Ferrari. Since the 917, and until recent years if you wanted to race and be in the hunt for a win at Lemans, you drove a Porsche. Heck... be it Ferrari, Ford or Porsche the old supercars have it all over the new ones! | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Advanced Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 4297 Registered: 8-2002 |
Yeah, i would say that's experience. What an awesome story.  | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1456 Registered: 10-2002 |
In 1998 I was at the Goodwood festival of Speed with my MK-IV. Jim Hall was there with his Chapparals. Seeing them in person was quite amazing. It was pissing rain. At Goodwood they send cars up the hill every 30 seconds. Jim was ahead of me in the "Sucker" CanAm Chapparal. This car used 2 snowmobil engines controlable from the cockpit to create downforce by sucking the air out from the inside of the car and a giant 492CI Chevy to provide forward thrust. Hall told me that standing still the snowmobil motors could suck the car upside down to the ceiling. This car was so far ahead of it's time it was banned. The MK-IV is pretty good in the rain. With it's wiper motor from a Boeing 707 and its demister fans you can even see where you're going and it tires were probably better than Halls slicks. Hall staged in front of me. Troy his mechanic and the Gentleman who had originally built and wrenched these cars came running back to me on the grid. "Hall saw you run yesterday and he thinks you're very fast. He's afraid that even with a 30 second lead you're going to catch him. Do you want to run in front of him?" "That Jim Hall thinks I could catch him is enough for me. I can now die happy. Tell him not to worry." Hall took off. Thirty seconds later I took off. I did catch him and was forced (Baulked) to slow down. We drove up the hill in formation. The sight of that car sucking down on the turns as Hall revved those snowmobil engines and sending spray 100 feet back toward me is something I still see in my dreams... | ||
| wm hart (Whart)
Intermediate Member Username: Whart Post Number: 1143 Registered: 12-2001 |
Its funny, but alot of this is generational, too. The GT-40 was, i think, way ahead of its time. Seeing it up close reveals how purpose built it is. But, keep in mind, its a pretty old car, when innovations in racing are made from one day to the next. At the same time, if i was given a choice between, say a 250 swb or a tour de france and an enzo, i gotta tell ya, its the old ones that do it for me. No point in one performing better than another since what the old car loses in performance (and i doubt Jim's Ford gives up much, even after all these years), is, to me more than made up by charisma. But, as they say about nostalgia,... | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Advanced Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 4296 Registered: 8-2002 |
Mr. 007; do you have any experience with the Chapparals...? They have a very exotic look for a racecar (not that any racecar doesn't look exotic); i've only recently seen pictures and i saw what looked like one at Classic Coach... | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1455 Registered: 10-2002 |
Jack The tunnel port 427 made so much torque over a such a wide range that that's all they needed. The Chapparals only used a 2 speed "auto" really a 2 speed with an auto dog clutch. At the time the MK-IV's T44 was the only box capable of dealing with that much torque. The Chapparal boxes were their downfall and the P4 box only had to deal with 450HP. Jim | ||
| Jack (Gilles27)
Member Username: Gilles27 Post Number: 907 Registered: 3-2002 |
I was wondering why they chose a 4-speed rather than 5. Maybe the thinking was "the simpler, the better". BTW, that DID make sense to me! | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Advanced Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 4290 Registered: 8-2002 |
Jack, hopefully if i'm wrong, 007 will correct me, but i believe that's how it was made, back when it was originally made (did that make sense?) ...unless, of course, you're asking why they originally made it with a 4 speed, which, then, would make me look like a complete moron for even responding. | ||
| Jack (Gilles27)
Member Username: Gilles27 Post Number: 904 Registered: 3-2002 |
James, why only a 4-speed in the GT? | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Advanced Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 4288 Registered: 8-2002 |
Contrary to the title, i wasn't trying to make this a 'comparison' thread; it's just so rare to see an Enzo in person or to see a GT40 in person (never saw one before, ever) that facing the two makes for an almost surrealistic feeling... At least for me... The Enzo is, hands down, my all-time favorite car, from any marque. Period. However, a Le Mans-winning racecar-turned road legal is something to behold, no matter what. i still sift through the pictures on my computer from that day, marvelling at the automotive masterpieces i was lucky enough to witness... Clearly, i was surrounded by some of the most exotic cars in the world; Enzo, 288 GTO, Diablo, F50, Countach, F40, Daytona, GT40, 333 SP, McLaren F1 - what was missing...? A Zonda...? A 962 CR( )...? (A Saturn...?) i didn't want this thread to be a pissing contest, rather just a reflection of endless possibilities contained within the motionless exotica before me, that day. | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1425 Registered: 10-2002 |
David My HP # is from dyno sheets but with all #'s they were often quoted and measured differently. Tim N You're right about the brakes. Wrong about the tires. The Ford turned a 3:22 at LeMans and recorded a top speed of 223 on the Mulsanne. (The track was a bit different then but it's possible to figure out the difference) Unlike ANY Ferrari since the day it raced there it also won... | ||
| David R. (Rodsky)
New member Username: Rodsky Post Number: 38 Registered: 3-2003 |
I meant Ford trying to buy Ferrari in my previous post - not the other way around. The deal falling through was one of the main reasons Ford decided to get into racing to whup Ferrari's A$%%$ at LeMans. They participated for a few years - achievd their objective and then retired. | ||
| Tim N (Timn88)
Advanced Member Username: Timn88 Post Number: 3057 Registered: 6-2001 |
I think the Enzo will own the GT40 on the track. Its 33 years newer. It has modern brakes, tires (i dont know what the GT40 is running though), traction control, moveable panels for ground effects, and a whole lot more stuff i dont even know about. | ||
| David R. (Rodsky)
New member Username: Rodsky Post Number: 36 Registered: 3-2003 |
James - I agree, comparisons are meaningless, they are from different eras. The GT40 is certainly a piece of history and would be more desireable to me. You got me curious, so I spent some time reading up on the GT40 story, the history, their racing victories, Ferrari trying to buy them (Lemans, Gurney/Foyt, etc.) Very fascinating stuff. By the way, several sites that I visited, quoted the MKIV's horsepower at 500 - you have stated 550HP. I have attached a few. Is this a different way of measuring - which one is correct? BTW, I saw a GT40 once in Northern California - I have no clue what year, model etc. However, when it took off, it was loud and very fast - unbelievably so. http://www.gt40.org.uk/Gallery/MkIV.htm http://formen.ign.com/news/18922.html?fromint=1&submit.x=80&submit.y=20 http://www.thecarsource.com/shelby/gt40/gt40b.html | ||
| Jordan Witherspoon (Jordan747_400)
Intermediate Member Username: Jordan747_400 Post Number: 1035 Registered: 12-2002 |
Im a Ferrari guy...but come on, owning an original Lemans winning race car just cant be topped...even if its not a Ferrari. I applaud Mr. Glickenhaus for driving his car on the street! | ||
| Matt (Matt_lamotte)
Member Username: Matt_lamotte Post Number: 372 Registered: 10-2002 |
James Your amount of technical statistics almost scares me I personally like the Enzo but from what I hear that GT-40 is no slouch. | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1414 Registered: 10-2002 |
David The MK-IV and the MKII had 427ci engines which made 550HP. The stats you site are from a MKI which had a 289ci engine. The MK-IV weighed 2205. The Enzo has 660HP but I think it weighs a bit more. The MK-IV went 223. The Enzo is said to go 217 by the factory although it may be faster. The Ford when it raced at LeMans wasn't really geared for 0-100. Indeed it adveraged 135 per for 24 hours including stopping for fuel and driver change. The Ford was designed to beat Ferrari at LeMans which it did. The nearest P4 was 130 miles behind. On the street with the gearing I have in it now 4.56/1 vrs the 3.33/1 in the MKI you cited and with 125 more hp it's 0-100 would be pretty quick less than the 8 sec. you cited but I'm not sure if it would beat the Enzo and even if it did the Enzo would beat it in top speed as it has 6 speeds vrs 4 in the Ford. Magazine times, bench racing, are important to some but the 2 guys I know who own Enzo's couldn't care less and even though I'm interested in specifications I like them are much more interested in driving. The Ford is a piece of History. The Enzo is a technological marvel a F1 car for the street. It's like comparing Michangello's David and Leonardo's Mona Lisa. You can have an opionion but anyone who compares them with a tape measure is an idiot. Best Jim | ||
| Andrew Menasce (Amenasce)
Member Username: Amenasce Post Number: 978 Registered: 10-2001 |
All i know is that i couldnt keep with James when he was accelerating away and i was driving the 360 ! Pretty impressive to see this yellow monster pulls away like if i were standing still | ||
| Frank Parker (Parkerfe)
Intermediate Member Username: Parkerfe Post Number: 2335 Registered: 9-2001 |
I'm just glad to see Ford had the guts to make the car. | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Advanced Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 4245 Registered: 8-2002 |
Anyone have any response to David's inquiry...? Now i'm just as curious as he is, seeing as how i was convinced the GT40 would eat the Enzo... | ||
| Faisal Khan (Tvrfreak)
Junior Member Username: Tvrfreak Post Number: 195 Registered: 3-2003 |
Stephen, there's a couple of pics here: http://www.ferrarichat.com/discus/messages/21/252228.html?1053716792 | ||
| Faisal Khan (Tvrfreak)
Junior Member Username: Tvrfreak Post Number: 194 Registered: 3-2003 |
Yes, it's gorgeous. It's being called the GT, because Ford was asked to pay $40 million to use the GT40 name. It was also at the Concorso Italiano last year, and has been at most of the big shows. I believe the limited production run is all sold out, and I am sure these cars will exchange hands for a very large premium. Beautiful car. | ||
| stephen r chong (Ethans_dad)
Member Username: Ethans_dad Post Number: 274 Registered: 3-2002 |
Did anyone see the new GT40 that was shown at the Hillsborough Concours earlier this month? Ford was the featured marque, and I think a few of the local bay area owners went down to check it out. I think the new design still captures the original lines, but adds some modern technologies/techniques. | ||
| David R. (Rodsky)
New member Username: Rodsky Post Number: 35 Registered: 3-2003 |
I am not that familiar with the GT40. But two people have stated here that it will be much faster than an Enzo on the track. I did some research and came back with the following for the GT40. Engine: 4942 cc, bore x stroke: 101.6 mm x 76.2 mm. Power: 425hp@6000rpm. Torque: 396ftlb@4750rpm. Performance: 0-100 mph 8 secs (0-161 kph 8 secs) Max. speed: 210 mph (380 kph) Isn't the Enzo faster (0-100MPH)? I am curious as to why people will think a GT40 will clown it on the track. by the way, this is not a sarcastic question or I think an Enzo is faster - I am genuinely interested to hear from people that know more than me.. | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Advanced Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 4238 Registered: 8-2002 |
You all are crazy and must think i am, too... i knew full well when i posted this that the GT40 will clown an Enzo on the track; it's just so rare to see two cars like this, at all, let alone, together... It does make for some interesting wonder-ifs, but i'm no fool; i know the Enzo will only show up in the MK IV's mirrors... Both cars are really awesome to look at it... Can say much else about them, but i like them both... i mean, geez, one's a full-blown racecar and the other isn't too far behind... i'm glad this thread went civil, too... Look at Mr. G.'s response and compare it to one of Allan's, in a Lamborghini thread... 'nuff said. | ||
| Andrew Menasce (Amenasce)
Member Username: Amenasce Post Number: 975 Registered: 10-2001 |
LOL , nice job DES . I dunno , i guess id have to drive both before judging ;) ... Could i have a P4 instead ? | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1410 Registered: 10-2002 |
IMHO they are both amazing cars and there are a lot of great and amazing cars and people who love cars are able to see that and appreciate all of them. For a car that was built 33 years ago the MK-IV still looks good. Best Jim | ||
| Faisal Khan (Tvrfreak)
Junior Member Username: Tvrfreak Post Number: 190 Registered: 3-2003 |
I have written about 5 emails and deleted them before posting. But it must be done. DES, sorry to burst your bubble, but there's just no comparison. Style-wise, the Enzo is full of conflicting lines and angles, and has an overall weird shape. It carries it off because it is fairly dramatic, but it can't compare to any of the gorgeous Ferraris like the 250 SWB or the original Testarossas, or the cigar-shaped single seater racers, or...well, you get my point. The GT40 has amazing road presence, and totally dominated when it was next to the red Enzo when I saw them being driven side by side on the road. I do that think that the rear of the GT40 is a bit slabby, and the back of the side windows a bit too vertical, but what it may lack in style, it more than make up with in race-bred details. Couple that with years of heritage, an incredible and very significant race history, and the Enzo is just a glitzy bauble for now. It might be capable, yes, but it can't hold a candle to the GT40. C'mon DES, it's not worth crying about. They're both amazing cars. | ||
| Taek-Ho Kwon (Stickanddice)
Member Username: Stickanddice Post Number: 491 Registered: 11-2002 |
GT-40 please... Classic lines and history that's tough to beat. I've always been a classic car guy wanna-be though. Latest and greatest is wonderful, but a classic like a GT-40 screams love for motorsports that no modern machinery can equal. I like analog switches too. I'm impatiently waiting for the day I have to turn my wipers on my using a toggle switch! Clunk Clunk Hehehe Yeah! Cheers | ||
| Me Myself (Kid_enzoz)
New member Username: Kid_enzoz Post Number: 28 Registered: 4-2003 |
The bloody Enzo Ferrari! | ||
| Vincent (Vincent348)
Member Username: Vincent348 Post Number: 351 Registered: 4-2003 |
Des, You're not going to like this. The lines on the GT-40 are just so nice. Not so tricked out. But of course the technology is a bit dated. This is a tough one. | ||
| Omar (Auraraptor)
Member Username: Auraraptor Post Number: 581 Registered: 9-2002 |
I'd take the yellow one. Which yellow? Both. | ||
| John A. Suarez (Futureowner)
Member Username: Futureowner Post Number: 654 Registered: 3-2002 |
On the track?? GT40 wins hands down. But how about against an F50 GT1? | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Advanced Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 4235 Registered: 8-2002 |
 |